Sunday, 6 January 2013
What was the purpose of the recent posts here?
I dare say that there are those who have been wondering why I have been going on about high profile home educators, their neurological problems and strange beliefs. Is it just a protracted outburst of malice and spite on my part, or could there be a rational explanation? The reason is simple and uncomplicated. Many of those who represent or claim to represent home education in this country do more harm than good. Whatever their actual mental state, they give the impression of being odd and irrational. This negative image reflects badly on ordinary, sane and well balanced home educating parents, who find themselves being viewed askance because of the behaviour of a vociferous lunatic fringe.
The problem is that the sort of things that I have been writing about here over the last few days are pretty well known to those in local authorities, government departments and so on who have an interest in children who are being educated at home. They are alarmed by the antics of the well known home educators and former home educators and wish to bring in tighter controls, in case most home educating parents are as crazy as those one sees in the public spotlight. Let me give one or two examples of how this works.
When Graham Badman asked Paula Rothermel whether she thought that many home educating parents were suffering from Munchausen’s by proxy, it was not a random question or one intended to smear an entire community. It was a perfectly reasonable thing to ask, based upon what we see among the people about whom I have been writing; those home educating parents who appear in newspapers, magazines, on the radio and television and so on. I mentioned a specific case yesterday of a mother with a neurological condition which defied diagnosis and whose daughter went on to present with a similar disorder. I know of two other mother/daughter pairs of the same type; both involving very well known home educators. There are also a fair number of such people who claim that their children are on the autistic spectrum, have dyslexia or ADHD, either without a diagnosis or in spite of a professional diagnosis that these syndromes are not present.
Another point is that when a well known home educator, whom local authorities and so on are treating as being a leader of the home educating community, turns out to believe that the queen is a shape shifting lizard or that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion should be in the non-fiction section at the library, then it makes ordinary people wonder what other madness is lurking beneath the surface! Some people take these weird characters to be typical examples of home educators and jump to the conclusion that most home educating parents must be mad.
This is an unfortunate situation for home education in this country, that most of the well known people involved in it come across as being the kind of lunatics that one would hesitate to trust with the care of a child. I have no idea what the remedy might be, but the next time that people are complaining that some government department or charity is acting as though home educators need to be watched and supervised, we might stop and think what sort of example some of these prominent figures are setting. It is by them that many people judge home educating parents as a group.
You have been trying to conjure this spectre for years, Simon. No one believes you. If they did, then the current government wouldn't be so supportive of HE in this country.
ReplyDeleteSmears and gossip aren't taken seriously.
The people who were called to the parliamentary committee to give evidence on HE a few years ago *were* taken seriously, because the things they said made sense. That is presumably why the select committee report which followed was so positive.
These posts just make you look like the unpopular child in the playground with your finger-pointing and shouts of, 'He's only got one leg, don't play with him!' or 'She dresses up at the weekend and in any case, don't you know she's married to GERMAN' and 'He's sick in the head!' or 'She thinks she's a lizard!' etc
Are there real issues to address in HE? Yes. So, make a positive contribution to the debate instead of all this silliness.
I meant a few months, not years, ago. Yes, I thought it a very affirming report.
Delete'The people who were called to the parliamentary committee to give evidence on HE a few years ago *were* taken seriously, because the things they said made sense. That is presumably why the select committee report which followed was so positive.'
ReplyDeleteThe report was positive? Are you serious about this? It endorsed almost the whole of Graham Badman's proposals; they felt the same about home educators as he did! A few random examples:
62. In our view it is unacceptable that local authorities do not know accurately how many children of school age in their area are in school, being home educated or are otherwise not in school.
The report went on to suggest that parents be given the chance to register voluntarily and if they had not all done so after two years, then then registration should become compulsory.
106. We believe that local authorities should have the right, on safeguarding grounds, to refuse or revoke registration to home educate.
81. We recommend that home educating families be required to meet with their local authority officer within three months of the child's home education commencing and on an annual basis thereafter.
Is this really what you mean by a positive report on home education? have you read it? They agreed with Badman about the safeguards needed for home education and for much the same reasons.
Simon: provide supporting evidence for your claim about the mental state of HE leaders - statistics and significance, not mere anecdotes.
ReplyDelete"a leader of the home educating community, turns out to believe that the queen is a shape shifting lizard"
ReplyDeleteDo you even have evidence for anecdotal claims such as this? Believing some aspects of the NWO conspiracy theory is not the same as swallowing it all, hook, line and sinker. You, yourself, presumably hold some religious beliefs or see some benefit in the church, yet you don't believe everything put out by the church you attend, do you? Why would others be any different?
First of all, I would ask that you provide concrete proof that the queen is NOT a shape shifting lizard!
ReplyDeleteSecondly, kindly provide your evidence of the mental state of all home eduators you refer to, along evidence their illnesses are made up, that their children dont have diagnoses, and exact proof that they hold the views you mentioned.
Simon, I do feel you are really missing the point. The people you mention are more than capable of functioning and existing within the framework of modern society. Yes, they represent the Home Education community within the public arena, but they articulate the cause extremely well and have secured positive outcomes.
ReplyDeleteAs a Home Educator, with children in tow in term time, I meet a lot of people who are ignorant to Home Education. They are unaware that it is a choice and have not concerned themselves with the Badman report or indeed any other issues regarding it. I doubt if they are aware of the groups or representatives concerned, let alone their choices in health, food preferences or learning issues.
These people offer practical support and information. Some of it may be misguided, but it advice is available to all who ask.
What do you offer the Home Education Community? I feel your opinions and personal vendettas only serve to try to undermine and destroy a generally cohesive group of people who are excising their right in law to educate their children.
'along evidence their illnesses are made up, that their children dont have diagnoses, '
ReplyDeleteI have no idea if any illnesses have been made up. I know that some people make claims in the absence of a diagnosis, because they say things like, "I think my son is on the spectrum" or "I'm sure he's dyslexic". I am not going to provide proof, because I am not going to name the people concerned. However, if you want to hunt round for bloggs and so on, it is a fairly easy thing to do. Almost all the stuff that I have seen has been in the public domain.
This is hardly hard evidence of anything. I've been on emails lists for decades and I've seen that sort of thing too.
DeleteI'll give an example from my own experience.
I made an offhand comment once, wondering if my son had dysgraphia. That generated quite a lot of response. I investigated further, realised that he didn't, worked on writing stamina with him. No further issues.
If you had seen my original comment online, you may have thought, 'This woman thinks her son has dysgraphia.' However, it wasn't a 'claim in the absence of diagnosis', that was someone testing a hypothesis within a community of people who may be able to offer advice.
Others may use certain terms as a working theory, not feeling the need to persue an oifficial diagnosis because they feel it wouldn't assist the child at that point.
So, I've certainly seen the sort of thing you are referring to, but it certainly doesn't have any kind of sinister import.
'These people offer practical support and information. Some of it may be misguided, but it advice is available to all who ask.'
ReplyDeleteI am afraid that I have a different view on this. Where children are concerned, misguided or bad advice can be a very serious matter. I don't doubt that some of the people about whom I have been writing are genuinely convinced of the truth of what they say, but this is irrelevant.
'I feel your opinions and personal vendettas only serve to try to undermine and destroy a generally cohesive group of people who are excising their right in law to educate their children.'
Talking about a personal vendetta will not make this true. It is not the case. As for this talk of a cohesive group of people, I must ask you to wait until tomorrow, when I will be providing a link to a site that might interest you. That you talk of parents exercising a 'right' tells me that you are on the wrong track entirely. the only rights I am concerned with are those of children; not parents. Parents have duties, not rights. Their children do not belong to them.
"the only rights I am concerned with are those of children; not parents. Parents have duties, not rights. Their children do not belong to them."
DeleteChildren don't belong to the state either, but the kind of control advocated by you and some in the LEAs, civil service and the previous government amounts to creating state ownership of children.
'I meant a few months, not years, ago. Yes, I thought it a very affirming report.'
ReplyDeleteI honestly have not the least idea what you mean by 'a very affirming report'. Do you mean that it affirmed the views that you happen to hold?
Simon, you have studiously ignored repeated requests for firm evidence to substantiate the claims you have made on this blog over the last few days. You have been asked to provide a statistical comparison with other leadership groups, showing a significant difference between the home educators and the control group.
ReplyDeleteIn ignoring this, you have merely repeated some silly unsubstantiated anecdotes. All rather remarkable for a man who berated Paula Rothermel for her statistics.
One can only conclude that you are a fraud and a liar.
'Talking about a personal vendetta will not make this true. It is not the case.'
ReplyDeleteDo you imagine people reading here have amnesia? How can anyone forget your treatment of certain people over the years you've had this blog?
Back in October you promised another article in a few days on teaching young children to read. Instead, you disappeared for months and came back to vilify some people.
ReplyDeleteWhat happened?
'Back in October you promised another article in a few days on teaching young children to read. Instead, you disappeared for months and came back to vilify some people.
ReplyDeleteWhat happened?'
There is no mystery about that. I stopped posting for a while because I and my family were being threatened and harassed by home edcuators who did not agree with my point of view. To give one example, after I revealed the astonishing news that Education Otherwise's representative in Wales was living in Wales, a facebook campaign was launched against me. Cheryl Moy, a close associate of Alison Sauer, asked, 'What's his wife called?' My address was then circulated to various people and suggestions made for causing me and my family harm. I have a family to think of. I have given a link to Cheryl Moy's blog today and I am sure that you will see what sort of person she is.
I decided that the nature of home education today in this country and in particular those who set themselves up as its leaders, was more important than my views on learning to read. Incidentally, I would not say that I have been vilifying anybody. I have simply described what is going on and observed certain trends. Drawing attention to these is hardly vilification, particularly since those concerned are always putting information about both their own neurological problems and those of their children, into the public domain. None of it is a secret.
"I stopped posting for a while because I and my family were being threatened and harassed by home edcuators who did not agree with my point of view. To give one example, after I revealed the astonishing news that Education Otherwise's representative in Wales was living in Wales, a facebook campaign was launched against me. Cheryl Moy, a close associate of Alison Sauer, asked, 'What's his wife called?' My address was then circulated to various people and suggestions made for causing me and my family harm."
DeleteYou wrote about that at the time, then deleted the relevant posts and moved on to something more constructive. The sequence of events you describe doesn't really ring true, but I guess it's par for the course in the murky world of Simon Webb
Now, where's the supporting evidence we've been requesting?
ReplyDelete'The sequence of events you describe doesn't really ring true, but I guess it's par for the course in the murky world of Simon Webb'
ReplyDeleteBy which I take it that you mean that you do not think that it was the case that I drew attention to the fact that Education Otherwise's Welsh representative lived in Wales and that this caused a facebook campaign against me? One which involved Tracy Mcpherson in Berwick, Sarah Eaton in Leicester, Kat Brown in Leeds, Hellen Barnes-Kowalkowski in Nottingham, Cheryl Moy, Jai Daniels-freestone, Alison Sauer and various others? What is your understanding of the sequence of events?
We know all that; it doesn't really explain why, after moving on to something constructive, you suddenly stopped for months then return, bitter and twisted as usual, with a vengeance.
DeletePerhaps the shock of receiving positive comments and thanks was simply to much for you. Maybe you get some sort of adrenalin rush from being attacked.
'Now, where's the supporting evidence we've been requesting?'
ReplyDeleteWhat evidence are you actually requesting? Do you mean names of people and the disorders from which they and their children suffer? If you would be a little more specific, it would help.
"What evidence are you actually requesting? Do you mean names of people and the disorders from which they and their children suffer? If you would be a little more specific, it would help."
ReplyDeleteNo, definitely no names please; I want to see:
- your chosen definition of mental state;
- the way in which this has been measured;
- your chosen significance threshold;
- the definition of the home education leader sample;
- the definition of the control sample(s) from
other leadership groups;
- the raw - ANONYMISED - data;
- the statistical tests used;
- the resultant difference, significance levels/p-values.
Clear enough? Failing that, the raw, anonymised data will do and we can take care of the rest.
'- your chosen definition of mental state;
ReplyDelete- the way in which this has been measured;
- your chosen significance threshold;
- the definition of the home education leader sample;
- the definition of the control sample(s) from
other leadership groups;
- the raw - ANONYMISED - data;
- the statistical tests used;
- the resultant difference, significance levels/p-values.'
Hmmm, sound like somebody who has studied economics! I have a suspicion that this is actually one of those very people about whom I have been writing. Still, that's nothing to the purpose. Obviously, neither I nor anybody else has undertaken any systematic research of this sort. It would in any case be impossible, unless we were first to have working definitions of who constitutes a 'leader' and so on. Never the less, there are some fair points here.
As far as the definition of a mental state is concerned, it is enough for me if somebody claims that either they or their children are dyslectic, on the spectrum, mentally ill or suffering from some neurological disorder or learning difficulty. Even if these claims were to be untrue, they could still point to a pattern.
This has not been measured. I am content that if somebody says that she has a neurological condition of unknown origin and that her daughter is suffering from the same thing, for example, then there is something going on. This kind of claim is pretty rare in people one meets and so seeing three cases in any group is of interest.
Control grousps are almost impossible to establish, because in the case of a section of the population like home educators, almost everybody does not belong to the group. We know roughly the incidence of things like bipolar disorder, Munchausen's, ASD and so on in the general population and for all practical purposes, this is the control group.
As for the raw data, I am not about to compile a list of all the blogs, comments on newspaper articles by the people in whom I am interested and so on and then publish it here with the names redacted! Some names crop up in home edcuation again and again and it is these at whom I have been looking. If you wanted to glance at blogs like Staffordshire Natural Learning and so on, you could perhaps get a line on one of the mother/daughter neurological disorder pairs of whom I have spoken. This is just to set you on the trail; I think that if you were to google a few of those names who one often sees, you would soon be able to get an idea of what I am talking about.
Incidentally, who is this 'we' of whom you speak, as in 'we can take care of the rest'? Is this a team of home edcuating statisticians?
No, I am not an economist, nor am I anyone you have been writing about.
DeleteThese methods aren't confined to economics; if you knew the first thing about statistical inference and scientific method (i.e., getting at the truth, rather than making it up), you would have immediately recognised and understood the kind of things I requested. There's nothing at all unusual, and this applies across diverse fields: social, physical and life sciences, engineering, humanities... just about everything where measurement can be applied - and the measures don't have to be quantitative. None of this is rocket science, and from what I know of home educators - personally and from comments on this blog - quite a few could tackle this routinely, given access to the data.
Such methods are used to translate conjecture and hypothesis into tested theory; allowing us to make statements with some foundation.
Which leads us to your assertion about the mental state of "leaders" among home educators. In particular, we should be interested in whether your claim has any significance. Several respondents have indicated that leaders in many fields sometimes exhibit attributes that might, in some quarters, be considered "deviant". You were offered the opportunity to substantiate your claim - to show that leading home educators really do exhibit a significantly higher level of abnormal behaviour.
It's clear from your response that you can't even understand the question or why it is important, let alone provide a coherent response.
There is no need for me to comment further; I can leave readers to draw their own conclusions.
'Hmmm, sounds like somebody who has studied economics!'
DeleteReally? Sounds like someone who has studied any science, sociology, psychology or uses statistics as part of their work. Could be just about anyone.
''Hmmm, sounds like somebody who has studied economics!'
ReplyDeleteReally? Sounds like someone who has studied any science, sociology, psychology or uses statistics as part of their work. Could be just about anyone.'
Yes, this is of course perfectly true. There was something about the pedantry here that put me in mind of Mike Fortune-Wood, which is why I made the crack about economics. Often, when people use words like 'Hmmm', especially when they combine them with exclamation marks, it serves as an indication that this sentence is a little light-hearted.
"Yes, this is of course perfectly true."
DeleteBut you hadn't recognised that Simon.
"There was something about the pedantry here"
DeleteSo asking for for substantiation of a serious allegation is considered to be pedantry now; I guess truth has a low bar in the Webb household.
Now I understand where Simon has been for the last few months - he must have fallen for the Mayan apocalypse bunkum. Was it a cave or a mountain top, Simon?
'So asking for for substantiation of a serious allegation is considered to be pedantry now'
ReplyDeleteNot at all. I wonder if perhaps you understand the meaning of the word 'pedantry' in this context. I meant to convey that you were excessively keen to display academic learning, rather than that you were concerned with seeking the truth. It was the form of your comments to which I was referring and not the content.
You see you used a quite different register from everybody else in the discussion and that stuck out a little. If I was on an internet discussion where people were talking about most politicians being liars, it would make me appear a little odd if I leapt in and started demanding raw, anonymised data and p-values! As for Mayan caves and mnountain tops; there you have me completely foxed. I have written books about the archaeology of early Britain, but nothing at all to do with South America. is this a particular field of interest for you?
"I meant to convey that you were excessively keen to display academic learning, rather than that you were concerned with seeking the truth."
ReplyDeleteClearly, Simon, you're more accustomed to exploiting dialectic and rhetoric; these are fine when you want to argue a case, regardless of its validity. You seem to be ignorant of more rigorous approaches to inferring truth - or perhaps avoid them out of necessity.
"If I was on an internet discussion where people were talking about most politicians being liars, it would make me appear a little odd if I leapt in and started demanding raw, anonymised data and p-values!"
See above. Political discussions are usually one piece of BS vs another; truth is seen as something tawdry. Heaven forbid we should actually determine the best course of action, rather than rely on one's ignorance and prejudice - power would shift from the arts, humanities and law graduates to those grubby engineers and scientists!
So long and thanks for all the fun!
Simon wrote:
ReplyDelete"What evidence are you actually requesting? Do you mean names of people and the disorders from which they and their children suffer? If you would be a little more specific, it would help."
Then he described the respondent's detailed request for information as pedantry - astonishing!
It's going to be finish of mine day, but before ending I am reading this fantastic piece of writing to improve my know-how.
ReplyDeleteVisit my weblog :: visit
Way cool! Some very valid points! I appreciate
ReplyDeleteyou penning this article and also the rest of the site is very
good.
Look at my blog: over at this website
Dо yοu mind іf I quote a couple of уour posts as long aѕ I ρrovіde credіt and sources bаck to your site?
ReplyDeleteMy blog is in thе exaсt same arеa of inteгest as yours anԁ my visitors would genuinеly benefit from some of the іnfoгmation you provide
heгe. Please let me know if this okay ωith уou.
Cheеrs!
Visit my web blоg ... payday loans
hello there and thank you for your info ?
ReplyDeleteI have certainly picked up anything new from right here.
I did however expertise several technical points using this site, since I experienced to reload the site many times previous to I could get it to load properly.
I had been wondering if your web host is OK?
Not that I'm complaining, but sluggish loading instances times will often affect your placement in google and can damage your high-quality score if advertising and marketing with Adwords. Anyway I'm adding this RSS to my email and could look out for
much more of your respective intriguing content.
Make sure you update this again soon.
I hаve learn а few just гight stuff here.
ReplyDeleteCertaіnly price boοκmarking foг
revisіting. I ωonder hoω much
attempt you sеt to make this κind of Magnіfіcent
infoгmatіve ѕite.
Feel free to suгf to my weblоg - payday fast cash
Hеllo! І've been reading your blog for some time now and finally got the courage to go ahead and give you a hi from London. Just wanted to tell you keep up the fantastic work!
ReplyDeleteHere is my web page ... Todayhub.Com